The Beginning of a Case Against the Teamsters and Unions in General.

[Cab Lizzard]

What is their to defend when the law is cut and pasted for all to read. I pointed out the differance and agreed with Mr ldgarrit that he did indeed cut and paste the law for PAC's off the anti union right to work for less site which does not apply to the Teamsters PAC fund. As
As far as some smuck that wrote a book its his opinion not the facts. Hence nothing to defend.

Why is it none of you can defend the topics at hand. All you guy do is attack someone for their opinions rather than defend your own position.

May I ask why it bothers you all of a sudden what the teachers union is doing ? They have been on capitol hill everyday for as long as I can remember seeking out better education for your kids. Pay and benefits go right along with the quality education your child receives. I also take from your writings that you think teachers are socialists, maybe you should check out who is teaching your children and their qualifications ! After all many of today's educators are highly trained and have higher degree's than many CEO's and board members. Their for do they not need compensation for their skills ?

I've seen enough of this crap with the teacher unions in Wisconsin. running around with their socialist fist signs trying to defend their over the top benifits packages while the state was moving further to the red.

[slim66]

That is something you need to take to the ballot box. It happened in my community and I will vote accordingly. It is all about stopping the dues money. Why? Is it so wrong that workers have a voice? As far a union PACs, how much do you think Conway upper management contributed to PACs? Especially when card check was on the table. I know Fred Smith threw his money in. And now after Citizens United, how much of the missing 401k matches do you think will be contributed? Nobody FORCES anyone to pay dues, you can always work somewhere else that is non-union. That is what makes right to work such a crock.

[ssadab]

What is their to defend when the law is cut and pasted for all to read. I pointed out the differance and agreed with Mr ldgarrit that he did indeed cut and paste the law for PAC's off the anti union right to work for less site which does not apply to the Teamsters PAC fund. As
As far as some smuck that wrote a book its his opinion not the facts. Hence nothing to defend.

There was not a question as to the inent of the law. This dealt with the law being followed. This was the part was very interesting.

Recently, the Federal Election Commission has audited some well-known national union PACs to see if they had written authorizations from employees for the contributions the PACs were receiving. The results were astonishing. One national union PAC, according to the FEC audit, could not produce written authorizations for 93% of PAC contributions the FEC examined. Another national union PAC was unable to show authorizations for at least 67% of the contributions the FEC examined. This suggests a widespread problem: union PACs are making political contributions to federal candidates with employees' money taken without their written authorizations.

And as far as some schmuk writing a book, you're right, that is his opionion. Just like everything you or i post on here is opinion.

I have worked for both union and non-union companies so I too have seen it from both sides. Everyone that was hired on by Conway came into a non-union environment. they knew this from the day they applied. Yes this company has had some piss poor leaders since they brought on DaveM(fatbeard). Did I agree with the givebacks? NO. But we are still going thru the worst recession/depression since the Great Depression and I don't see the end in sight yet.

[Cab Lizzard]

You pay your hard earned dollars each check to the insurance company right ... Then what do they do with your money? They contribute to PAC's to open or close loop holes that hinder or help their business.

[ldgarrit]

That is something you need to take to the ballot box. It happened in my community and I will vote accordingly. It is all about stopping the dues money. Why? Is it so wrong that workers have a voice? As far a union PACs, how much do you think Conway upper management contributed to PACs? Especially when card check was on the table. I know Fred Smith threw his money in. And now after Citizens United, how much of the missing 401k matches do you think will be contributed? Nobody FORCES anyone to pay dues, you can always work somewhere else that is non-union. That is what makes right to work such a crock.

Workers have a voice, just like business owners, shareholders, and even the poor and unemployed, we all have a voice, it's called a vote and we all have the privelege to convert our voice into action every two years or so. How much Con-way upper management contributed to PAC's is irrevelavent, just as how much union members contribute to PAC's. One of the points I'm trying to make with this thread is that money does not always find it's way into PAC's in a legal way and that includes the PAC's sponsored by certain labor unions and possibly the Teamsters. More than half of the posters in these threads are trashing the company based on half-truths and rhetoric, while embracing the Teamsters as the Messiah coming to save them. I happen to disagree with biting the hand that feeds me and putting my trust into an organization that has a checkered legal history is something I simply don't care to do. I write what I write in the hopes that I can cast some doubt as to the credibility of the Teamsters in the minds of the undecideds at XCO and other SC's trying to organize.

What does the Citizens United decision have to do with how much will be contributed to our 401K plan?

[buffalobill]

Why is it none of you can defend the topics at hand. All you guy do is attack someone for their opinions rather than defend your own position.

I've seen enough of this crap with the teacher unions in Wisconsin. running around with their socialist fist signs trying to defend their over the top benifits packages while the state was moving further to the red.

more political bs. why are their benefits "over the top"? because they are better than yours, since you never had anything in a contract? wisconsin teachers don't get anything outrageous, you are just jealous because they have GOOD benefits locked into a contract.

I love it when you neo cons play the jealously card. everyone who has anything better than you has it too good and should have it taken away, especially when they were prudent enough to try and protect it, such as putting it into a legal contract.

[hanalad]

Why is it none of you can defend the topics at hand. All you guy do is attack someone for their opinions rather than defend your own position.

I've seen enough of this crap with the teacher unions in Wisconsin. running around with their socialist fist signs trying to defend their over the top benifits packages while the state was moving further to the red.

My opinion is you've been watching too much television and clandestine news channels.

[ldgarrit]

Here's a little something I found this morning regarding a letter from a Teamster union steward to Jimmy Hoffa regarding a new contract that his local leadership was trying to get the workers to ratify.

Is the Teamster Leadership whitewashing this contract? | TransportFool

Is the Teamster Leadership whitewashing this contract?
Posted on July 28, 2008 by Dave Campbell

Here is a copy of a letter posted on the teamster local 604 site:

July 23, 2008

James Hoffa
International Brotherhood of Teamsters
25 Louisiana Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20001

Dear President Hoffa,

My name is David Dawson and I am the Union Steward for Jack Cooper Transport in Kansas City, MO Local 41. As you know, the contract for Car haul is being voted on and aggressively being promoted by the Union. Our local president and business agent, Ralph Stubbs and Ken Booker presented the contract to us with poor results, consequently on July 14th Fred Zuckerman and Paul Hauck held a meeting to promote this tentative agreement. Unfortunately, this contract has numerous problems and there was active disagreement with a clear majority clearly against it. Later, it came to my attention from numerous phone calls that the Union website stated that after the contract presentation on the 14th, the men in Kansas City were going to approve this . Anyone at the meeting would have known that this contract was clearly going to be voted down by the reaction of the members at the meeting.

I called Paul Hauck on the 17th at the urging of many of my men to discuss this misleading posting on the web- site and voice my opinion of this misstatement. The conversation started out cordially for the first few sentences until I asked him if he remembered me and he replied that he did since I had asked some “ridiculous, asinine” questions. I asked him why the web site had the posting saying that the contract was going to pass in Kansas City ; he said he had talked to Ralph Stubbs, who assured him it would pass. Unfortunately, Stubbs never talked to any of the union stewards affected. After that our conversation turned into a tirade by Mr. Hauck where he called me an axxhole, a miserable fxxk, a fxxking axxhole so many times that I hung up the phone. I feel this kind of behavior is very unprofessional and beneath the Teamster organization.

I feel Mr. Hauck is paid by my union dues and has no right to talk to me or anyone else this way. If this is the way this man negotiates, no wonder we have a tentative contract that has very little in it for the employees. I would hope, as our President, you would counsel this man about how to talk to another Teamster and reprimand him if you see fit.

Thank you for your attention of this very serious manner. I trust you will do what is right .

Sincerely

David N. Dawson

First off, it's obvious that Mr. Hauck treated Mr. Dawson poorly and that his actions were out of line. Similar to what some of the pro-union people complain about company management, although I have yet to hear an actual story of an FOS actually cussing out a driver. The point is that once again, it would appear that occasionally, Teamster leadership has a problem with carrying out their primary function of protecting the dues paying members from "unfair" labor practices. It happened in MO, what would prevent it from happening where your local is?

Secondly, the dispute was over a contract the steward knew was fatally flawed. Why would the union leadership, after negotiating with management, come back with a contract that was stacked in favor of the company? Anyone care to take a shot at that one?

[ssadab]

more political bs. why are their benefits "over the top"? because they are better than yours, since you never had anything in a contract? wisconsin teachers don't get anything outrageous, you are just jealous because they have GOOD benefits locked into a contract.

I love it when you neo cons play the jealously card. everyone who has anything better than you has it too good and should have it taken away, especially when they were prudent enough to try and protect it, such as putting it into a legal contract.

I guess 90 sick days a year is commonplace. yes in the Appleton WI area teachers got 90 sickday but I guess thats not over the top.

[companyclown]

Dont they get to "use" those for summer pay? Just a thought.....